> > > > The reasoning I had for thinking it was reasonable is that the > > meta-attribute already has get_value, set_value, etc, so I don't see > > why > > it shouldn't also control the inline versions of those. It would > > probably make things simpler for attributes that wanted to use a > > different slot configuration than we have by default. That is exactly the reason for my proposed changes. > > Okay, that does make some sense, but I am concerned that people will > attempt to override them at that point (in a subclass of Attribute) > instead of in the instance metaclass where it belongs. If we can > prevent that from happening I would feel better.
I added a link to the instance meta class in the minimal documentation to the new methods. Perhaps I should add that the attribute meta-object has to use the appropriate instance meta-object to do anything with the instance directly and the right way to change the object data structure itself is to change the instance meta-class? I'm still not sure how much extending Class::MOP and Moose should be documented at this place? - xabbu42 > > - Stevan >
